ADSB rule amendment

[bestbearhawk1231]

Hi all, if you haven't already heard there was a change to the ADSB rule that came out back in 2010. Basically, then the original rule proposal went out it was intended that you could use TSO certified equipment or experimental equipment that met the minimum performance standards set by the TSO but had not been certified. At some point between the proposal and the final rule a couple key words were left out that created a lot of confusion and stated that ONLY certified equipment could be used. On Feb 9th, 2015 that changed and the wording has been changed back to what it was originally intended to be. At this point, as I understand it, it is still up to the equipment manufacturer to provide documentation that their experimental equipment meets those TSO standards and can be used for ADSB compliance. I was notified of this change through a newsletter email from AOPA and I read the article in the link provided which was provided by AVweb. I also looked into it on the FAA website and found a document that stated the change was correct.

This is the link to the FAA document.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-02-09/pdf/2015-02579.pdf

Link to the AVweb article.

http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/FAA-Amends-ADS-B-Rule223533-1.html

[bestbearhawk1231]

This is a big deal for anyone who owns, operates, or is building an experimental aircraft within the US and provides avionics suppliers and installers the opportunity to sell and install experimental avionics as being in compliance with ADSB and not be in violation of federal law by doing so. Prior to this change anyone who sold you non certified avionics (transponders, WAAS GPSs) and stated that they were ADSB compliant was walking on the shady side and waiting, hoping, praying for the rule change to happen before ADSB out went into effect. This will take a bit to trickle down to the FBOs who will most likely want to see the new wording in print before they act on it.

[Zzz]

That's good news. Just today I saw this posted on GA News. Seems like a pretty affordable solution:

http://generalaviationnews.com/2015/02/12/navworx-unveils-ads-b-solution-for-experimentals-and-lsas/

[bestbearhawk1231]

It wouldn't suprise me if we start seeing "adapters" such as that one Zzz posted in the $300 range in the next few years for experimental.

[Rolly LSA]

If ADSB "out" is going to be required by 2020, I hope someone will start figuring out where to put it. I am building the LSA and while the cockpit looks like it will be comfortable, the panel is small, the firewall is small, and I am already planning on small instruments. Are you going to have your airplane finished in 5 years or less? Rolly

[N3UW]

I really like the NavWorx option that Zzz pointed out above. i am still a little unclear with that option if the user will need some sort of aux panel to sync the adsB unit with the transponder code or will the NavWorx unit pick up the beacon code of the mode C transponder and coordinate its output like on the Garmin unit. Also hope this rule correction will allow the some existing implementations t become compliant. I have a friend with a garmin 330es transponder and a Garmn G3x panel that does not currently meet the 2020 requirement because the G 3 X does not send out the necessary location sentences to the 330Es transponder to make it complient. Today the only solution is to hook up a garmin 430/530 or better IfR gps. Hopefully with this change, garmin will add the message messages to the G3x to make it meet he TSO performance standards without having to meet the full onerous TSO requirements.

[N3UW]

Ok so I now see how NavWorx syncs the transponder with the ADS-B transmitter. They have a cool little usb device that clips around the transponder cable and connects back to their adsB unit. It will automatically sync up the units. It looks like to do not need to have anything on the panel. Might have an on/off switch or similar.